Publication details

Central Pathology Review in SENTIX, a Prospective Observational International Study on Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Patients with Early-Stage Cervical Cancer (ENGOT-CX2)

Authors

NEMEJCOVA K. KOCIAN R. KOHLER C. JARKOVSKÝ Jiří KLAT J. BERJON A. PILKA R. SEHNAL B. GIL-IBANEZ B. LUPO E. PETIZ A. SANCHEZ O. A. KASCAK P. MARTINELLI F. BUDA A. PRESL J. BARAHONA M. VAN LONHUIJZEN L. SZATKOWSKI W. MINÁŘ Luboš PAKIZ M. HAVELKA P. ZORRERO C. MISIEK M. SNYMAN L. C. WYDRA D. VERGOTE I. VINNYTSKA A. REDECHA M. MICHAL M. TINGULSTAD S. KIPP B. SZEWCZYK G. TOTH R. GARCIA F. J .D. MARTIN P. J. C. POKA R. TAMUSSINO K. LUYCKX M. FASTREZ M. STARINGER J. C. GERMANOVA A. PLAIKNER A. BAJSOVA S. DUNDR P. MALLMANN-GOTTSCHALK N. CIBULA D.

Year of publication 2020
Type Article in Periodical
Magazine / Source Cancers
MU Faculty or unit

Faculty of Medicine

Citation
Web https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6694/12/5/1115
Doi http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers12051115
Keywords sentinel lymph node; cervical cancer; metastases
Description The quality of pathological assessment is crucial for the safety of patients with cervical cancer if pelvic lymph node dissection is to be replaced by sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy. Central pathology review of SLN pathological ultrastaging was conducted in the prospective SENTIX/European Network of Gynaecological Oncological Trial (ENGOT)-CX2 study. All specimens from at least two patients per site were submitted for the central review. For cases with major or critical deviations, the sites were requested to submit all samples from all additional patients for second-round assessment. From the group of 300 patients, samples from 83 cases from 37 sites were reviewed in the first round. Minor, major, critical, and no deviations were identified in 28%, 19%, 14%, and 39% of cases, respectively. Samples from 26 patients were submitted for the second-round review, with only two major deviations found. In conclusion, a high rate of major or critical deviations was identified in the first round of the central pathology review (28% of samples). This reflects a substantial heterogeneity in current practice, despite trial protocol requirements. The importance of the central review conducted prospectively at the early phase of the trial is demonstrated by a substantial improvement of SLN ultrastaging quality in the second-round review.